press review 2006 nuclear proliferation Iran India


Published on

press review 2006 nuclear proliferation Iran India

Published in: News & Politics, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Hamshahri
  • press review 2006 nuclear proliferation Iran India

    1. 1. Revue de presse 23 mars 2006 Inde & Iran : 2 poids, 2 mesures en matière de non-prolifération nucléaire ? Guillaume Payre ESPACE MONDIAL – Sciences Po Paris
    2. 5. CHRONOLOGY : INDIA’s nuclear program <ul><li>1947 : partition, nuclear program starts </li></ul><ul><li>1955-60 : agreement CIRUS (Canada-India Reactor, U.S. ) </li></ul><ul><li>1968 : India refused to sign the NPT </li></ul><ul><li>1974 : 1st nuclear test </li></ul><ul><li>1998 : 5 other nuclear tests </li></ul><ul><li>-> sanctions on India </li></ul><ul><li>2001 : sanctions lifted </li></ul><ul><li>18 July 2005 : India & USA seek deal </li></ul><ul><li>2 March 2006 : agreement signed, still need to be ratified by Congress </li></ul>
    3. 7. <ul><li>“ Our Opportunity With India” </li></ul><ul><li>By Condoleezza Rice , Monday, March 13, 2006 : </li></ul><ul><li>«  Iran may seek to draw connections between themselves and India, but their rhetoric rings hollow  » </li></ul><ul><li>«  First, our agreement with India will make our future more secure, by expanding the reach of the international nonproliferation regime […] but our agreement will not enhance its capacity to make more [nuclear weapons] » </li></ul><ul><li>«  Second, our agreement is good for [India’s] energy security » </li></ul><ul><li>«  Third, our agreement is good for American jobs » </li></ul><ul><li>«  Finally, our civilian nuclear agreement is an essential step toward our goal of transforming America's partnership with India  » </li></ul><ul><li>«  We are consulting extensively with Congress as we seek to amend the laws needed to implement the agreement.  » </li></ul>
    4. 8. Robert KAGAN “India Is Not a Precedent” <ul><li>Sunday, March 12, 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Circumstances Justify the 'Double Standard' of Our Nuclear Deal </li></ul><ul><li>«  huge nation, a huge democracy , powerful and increasingly sympathetic to the ideological and strategic objectives of the US </li></ul><ul><li>« Russia and China , two huge geopolitical problems » </li></ul><ul><li>« as Bismarck would have said , we want the closest possible relationship, partnership, even alliance with such a country » </li></ul><ul><li>« the nuclear nonproliferation regime has been damaged and may now be collapsing but the the benefits outweigh the costs » </li></ul><ul><li>« The bigger question likely to consume endless hours of hearings on Capitol Hill in coming weeks is what effect the deal will have on the problem of Iran. Some will argue that the Indian nuclear deal harms efforts to halt Iran's nuclear weapons program because it erects a double standard: We are willing to let India do what we are not willing to let Iran do. » </li></ul><ul><li>« As for double standards , yes, we have double standards. The NPT erected a gargantuan double standard » </li></ul><ul><li>« Were Congress to reject the administration's deal that futile gesture would have a devastating effect on U.S. relations with India » </li></ul>
    5. 9. Joseph Cirincione “The US's nuclear cave-in” <ul><li> March 4, 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>« 8 / 22 Indian reactors would be exempt from IAEA inspections » </li></ul><ul><li>« India will increase its production from the estimated 6 to 10 nuclear bombs per year to 30 a year. India today has enough separated plutonium for 75-110 nuclear weapons » </li></ul><ul><li>« President Bush has done what Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Clinton and his father refused to do : break US and international law to aid India's program. In 1974 India cheated on its agreements » </li></ul><ul><li>« Bush violates the nuclear NPT and US Nonproliferation Act » </li></ul><ul><li>« this is essentially rewarding bad behavior and undermine the entire international framework of the nonproliferation regime. » </li></ul><ul><li>« The lesson Iran is likely to draw is simple : all this talk about violating treaties is just smoke » </li></ul><ul><li>« We can't tell Iran that has signed the nuclear NPT that they can't have enrichment technologies while simultaneously exemption for India, a nation that has refused to sign the treaty » </li></ul><ul><li>« implications : Pakistan and Israel expect to receive a similar deal » </li></ul>
    6. 10. Brahma Chellaney MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2006 <ul><li>« With international attention focused on Iran 's renegade nuclear program, a much-trumpeted nuclear deal that was to showcase the emerging global strategic partnership between the United States and India has begun to unravel virtually unnoticed » </li></ul><ul><li>« it is almost certain that no formal nuclear agreement will be ready for signature when President George W. Bush arrives in New Delhi on March » </li></ul><ul><li>« U.S. negotiators are seeking to constrict India's nuclear military capability before New Delhi has built a credible minimal deterrent against its main rival, China » </li></ul><ul><li>« America's goalpost-shifting approach shows it will accept India at most as a second-class nuclear power. India is unlikely to countenance that. » </li></ul>
    7. 11. 2 March 2006 IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei welcomes the cooperation <ul><li>« This agreement is an important step towards satisfying India´s growing need for energy , including nuclear technology and fuel, as an engine for development. It would also bring India closer as an important partner in the non-proliferation regime. It would be a milestone, timely for ongoing efforts to consolidate the non-proliferation regime and strengthen nuclear safety. »  </li></ul><ul><li>« The agreement would assure India of reliable access to nuclear technology and nuclear fuel. It would also be a step forward towards universalisation of the international safeguards regime » </li></ul><ul><li>« This agreement would serve the interests of both India and the international community . » </li></ul>
    8. 12. LOBBIES battle on Capitol Hill <ul><li>NEUTRALS (want conditions to be attached) : </li></ul><ul><li>Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, </li></ul><ul><li>Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations Committee </li></ul><ul><li>former Sen. Sam Nunn (Dem-Ga.) </li></ul><ul><li>FOR the US-India deal : </li></ul><ul><li>Administration (State Dep & Dep of Energy) </li></ul><ul><li>Neo-conservatives </li></ul><ul><li>nuclear lobby & U.S. Chamber of Commerce </li></ul><ul><li>Indian lobby </li></ul><ul><li>majority of Republicans </li></ul><ul><li>AGAINST the deal : </li></ul><ul><li>Iranian exiles </li></ul><ul><li>Non-proliferation lobby </li></ul><ul><li>Democrats </li></ul>
    9. 13. CHRONOLOGY : IRAN’s nuclear program <ul><li>1957 : Shah interested in civilian program </li></ul><ul><li>1968 : Iran signs and ratified the NPT </li></ul><ul><li>1974 : purchase fuel (FR) and reactors (G </li></ul><ul><li>1979 : Islamic Revolution stops programs </li></ul><ul><li>1980-88 : Iran–Iraq War, use of Chem W </li></ul><ul><li>2002: two secret nuclear sites discovered </li></ul><ul><li>2003 : EU3 & Iran suspend enrichment </li></ul><ul><li>10 Jan 2006 : Iran resumes enrichment </li></ul><ul><li>4 Feb 2006 : IAEA board adopts resolution </li></ul><ul><li>March 2006 : UN Security Council to vote </li></ul><ul><li>statement or resolut°; Russia & China to abstain </li></ul>
    10. 21. Sources & méthodologie <ul><li>newsmap </li></ul><ul><li>newspapers in English </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Think Tanks websites : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Carnegie endowment for int peace </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Nuclear Threat Initiative </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>FRS : Fondation pour la Recherche Stratégique </li></ul></ul><ul><li>experts Blogs (by RSS feeds) : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ArmsControlWonk </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Adobe Illustrator & Gimp to draw maps </li></ul>